[olug] MPAA toolkit

[Sam Tetherow]

Will Langford wrote:
> I've only given a synopsis read of the universities bill to require
> alternate music/video sources thing... and... uhhhh... if that does
> indeed pass, wow.
>
> From what I understand, businesses are required to keep all received
> resume's for up to... 3 years... I think.  Also, I believe they have
> to keep all emails that go through their servers for a given amount of
> time (lest they be inadvertantly destroying "evidence").  I'm not too
> sure if this broadened to include intra-company chat stuff (corporate
> icq, etc).
>
> ISP's being required to datamine connections is... a different and
> interesting bit.  From what I understand, if you posted anything
> questionable to usenet via your ISP, you could easily be tracked down.
>  There is a possibility that email headers plus 'simple connection'
> logs from the ISP would also be able to pin you down to an email
> originator.  ISP logging of all out/in bound connections would be
> rather insane, for sure.  From both technical and privacy points of
> view.
>   
As it stands right now most independant ISPs would not be able to say in 
court whether traffic for IP x.x.x.x belongs to user Y on date Z without 
a shadow of a doubt unless they were actively monitoring that IP address 
at the time. I know I could not and would not attest to it in a court of 
law. And I know first hand many ISPs that would be in the same boat. 
Heck I know of some that to this day could not be CALEA compliant even 
in spirit if a subpoena was issued.

Asking any large ISP to archive netflow data (or even worse all packets 
which was originally proposed by the FBI) would be cost prohibitive, but 
to take it a step farther, that data would be useless unless the ISP 
could also guarantee the accuracy of that data in the archive it would 
be useless (wouldn't hold up in a court of law).

And even if this law was to pass it would be pointless in the P2P realm 
because so many sites are going to encrypted data to circumvent packet 
inspection by ISPs who are trying to shape the traffic.

> In reguards to the commercialization and 'big brother' aspects of the
> internet... I recall using WinCIM and DOSCIM :).  It's kind of nice to
> have a plethora of backers to my searchings rather than just whoever
> did payola to Compuserve.  While Google's results have gotten slightly
> less useful over the last 3 years, it's still relatively easy to find
> whatever information you need within the first 100 results.  If you're
> concerned about 'big brother', you should be less dubious in your
> online activities; and if you really want, EFF offers a free anomnity
> proxy.  There's also the option of freenet.
>
> Anyhoo, getting back more on topic... having universities do something
> to stem illegal activities occuring within their networks is a good
> thing.  At work, if you do something bad, your business faces lawsuits
> as well as yourself.  Universities should have similar pressures.
> Requiring an alternate source for media is ... retarded and way out of
> bounds.
>
>   
> -Will
>
>   
Asking Universities to stem illegal activities on their networks is a 
good thing, holding all student aid and school funding hostage to the 
requests of a private business is something quite different. If a 
business is colluding in the wrong doing then it is liable, but if for 
instance if I was to use a work phone to call my bookie and place an 
illegal bet during March Madness I doubt you are going to find a court 
that will find my employer guilty of anything.

I don't necessarily have a problem with an IP owner pursuing their claim 
for damages, I do however have a problem with the RIAA and the MPAA 
using the federal government as their enforcement arm via legislative 
branch. If they want help from the Universities (or ISPs) show up with a 
properly executed search warrant and I am more than happy to abide by 
the law and to help law enforcement.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless